Pages

Mar 6, 2011

Irony in Neuromancer


In the final chapters of Gibson's Neuromancer, we are finally introduced to one of the remaining major characters of the novel. Case is still connected through his simstim unit to Molly, whose eye has been perversely crushed by Peter Riviera. Case learns through the link that 3Jane's mother, Marie-France Tessier, was the brain behind the Tessier-Ashpool AI's. 3Jane explains that Marie-France "was quite a visionary" and "imagined [the Tessier-Ashpools] in a symbiotic relationship with the AI's" to the point where these cyber constructs would make their "conscious decisions," rendering the family "immortal, a hive, each of [the relatives] units of a larger entity" (229). As Case and his Zionite backup Maelcum make their way to 3Jane's quarters where Molly is captive, he sees the image of the Finn who directs him to jack in. The Braun bot guiding him grasps his ankle in an effort to warn him, but Case continues with his orders.

Waking on a dull, grey beach with what looks like a city off in the distance, he is devastated to discover that the message was not from Wintermute. Imagining Ratz as he wanders around, the Ninsei bartender suggests Case has come to the beach to die. He presses on, finding Linda Lee in a bunker with a fire and food rations. Distraught, Case understands that the AI he last saw was "the other one" from Brazil not Wintermute, which tried to "warn [him] off with the Braun." He angrily acknowledges that he is flatlined, stuck in the middle of nowhere "with a ghost" of Linda just as he remembers her from before. Case realizes that the recurring images of Linda  he has encountered in his travels could not be from Wintermute, which found it "too tricky" to maintain such an emotionally charged construct. Linda explains how she arrived at the beach, found the bunker, and received food that washed up on the beach. She reveals that a "boy... on the beach" told her to expect Case who goes searching for the boy suspecting he is the Rio AI. Case finds the boy on the beach, who says his name is "Neuromancer... Neuro from the nerves... Romancer" taken from "Necromancer." The boy affirms that he is "the dead and their land" and urges Case to stay, affirming that "if [Linda] is a ghost, she doesn't know it" and Case will not tell the difference either. Neuromancer admits to Case, however, that "the choice is [his]" to stay or go. Case decides to leave and wakes up in the Villa Straylight, where Maelcum informs him he flatlined for almost five minutes. 

It's interesting that in the pursuit of immortality, the Tessier-Ashpools rely on technology so heavily – with AI's and cryogenic freezing – to the point where they become less human. This raises the question, can immortality and the human condition ever coincide? Even if technology enables people to live indefinitely, will those people still be what we call "human"? I think a lot of our instincts and actions stem from our awareness that life is finite, and I don't know that humanity would be the same without a time limit indirectly motivating our ambitions. Also, Neuromancer basically tells Case he is experiencing life after death and can choose to return to the living world or remain with Linda by accepting death. What if Case had not been jacked in? It almost seems like without death as a result of Neuromancer's intervention, Case would just be dead "meat" with no afterlife. Could you ever see technology serving a spiritual purpose?

5 comments:

  1. I think the very essence of being human is the fact that we are mortal/we will die at some point. I know this question of 'what is human' is the main question that the book presents and that the answer is not an easy one, but I still think that Gibson is defining humanity with the same basic concept that we have used to define it for centuries. Dixie Flatline might have been the personality of Pauley, but even he (the flatline) recognized that it was't Pauley and that it wasn't human.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's interesting that you point out how in the quest for immortality the Tessier-Ashpool family becomes less human. I think if that this type of technology does become available and people have the capability of living indefinitely our definition of what is "human" will have to evolve in some way, shape or form. Personally, the idea of considering myself as something other than "human" is frightening and I would prefer to alter the meaning of what it is to be human rather than change my label to something other than "human."

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think somehow somewhere people are already using technology for spiritual purposes, or maybe to prove against religion.
    On a different note I want to pose another question relating to extending life. If a human knows before he/she is dead that they are going to be saved like RAM, does that mean since that AI is aware that this is happened, it is not human? Or, if a person does not know they are going to be saved in RAM form and when they are in that form do not know any difference, does that make them even more human? My opinion is, even if you are a RAM, ROM, human or animal, the more "ignorant" you are about what you are, whatever you believe to be true is. I hope that's not two confusing (it makes sense in my head).

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think it comes down to how people define "human." Does that definition include what people consider the soul/spirit/consciousness, or does it solely focus on humans as organic beings?

    If we consider human to mean the spirit, then I believe that humanity and immortality can coincide. There's really no difference in being "alive" as we know it now, and experiencing a virtual reality like the Matrix (as long as we were unaware of it being an artificial reality). If the human personality could be uploaded to a computer, I don't see that as necessarily being a bad thing.

    But if one focuses on the biological aspect of being human, we would stop being human once our consciousness were controlled by a machine instead of our brains. I can easily imagine why some people would prefer death to life as a machine. I think Gibson explored the concept very well with Pauley's character.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that the pursuit of immortality through technology undermines the very essence of humanity and what it means to be human. Doesn't our value in human existence lie in the notion that our lives are ever so fragile? Do we lose that when we reach a point where technology can make us effectively immortal?

    ReplyDelete